Complaints about The Wikipedia article on Tremulous


#1

I've just noticed that GrangerHub's been vandalizing the English Wikipedia article on Tremulous. First this section was removed:

The stated reason for the change was:

Then this was added:

Yes, Unvanquished is a fork of Tremulous and no, Tremulous 1.3 is not the "latest official edition" of Tremulous. GrangerHub has nothing to do with Darklegion Development. Stop spreading misinformation.

Please do not involve Wikipedia in your petty politics.


#2


Would be interesting to know WHO did the changes.


#3

GrangerHub did not make those edits, individuals did on their own accord (as a side note, I'm not one of those individuals). @enneract , if you have issues with edits on Wikipedia then you should take that up with Wikipedia.

In the last quote you provided, I don't see anything saying that 1.3 is the "latest official eddition". That quote does have an inaccuracy though, it refferes to gpp as 1.2, and it should make the distinction. But it seems to me that "the latest official edition has not have a public release build yet" refers to where work on 1.2 on Dark Legion's Tremulous github repo left off, but that can be made more clear.

I don't know if multiprotocol can be discussed there though, nor the current status of the community as I don't know if there currently exists sources that Wikipedia would find acceptable (forum posts are not acceptable sources for Wikipedia).


#4

Plausible deniability doesn't work if you have a history of fucking people over.
BTW. One of the footnotes link to the "Tremulous 1.3 TODO" thread.

I forgot to mention this in the OP, sorry. It was cron and Virus.


#5

That should not be there based on the standards of Wikipedia as I understand it.


#6


#7

Proof?


#8

"GrangerHub has nothing to do with Darklegion Development."


#9

???

[enneract's claim] : ["vandalism" by grangerhub]

[sparky's denial of claim] : [done by individuals, not by grangerhub]

[enneract's response] : invalid because ["you" (?) fucked people before ] = ["you" (?) will fuck people now] therefore = [it was done by grangerhub]

Nah. Bullshit logic. Perhaps it made more sense in your head than it did on a public forum post.

This claim is already invalid for the faulty logic I've shown above, but let's assume that it holds true and see what you constituted as "misinformation" by "GrangerHub".

I lack the experience and knowledge to debate this part adequately. The "editors" of the article claim it is a port, while you claim it is a fork because [reasons]. This appears to be a conflict of the usage of the term "fork" than an attempt at "misinformation".

VS.

The most debatable aspect of the former quote is using the term "official", seeing as Dark Legion Development is no more (Tremulous IP is up in the air). However, the former quote clearly specifies that said latest build isn't even released and it (implied to be Tremulous 1.3) is Tremulous. Therefore, I agree it is incorrect, but it's far from what any reasonable person would call "misinformation". Just remove the word "official".

You say these Wikipedia edits are about "petty politics" which is a strange statement coming from yourself, seeing as there is public record of you confessing that you seek the CODEZ(tm) for your own personal amusement.


tl;dr I fail to see anything in your OP establishing the claims you've made. Perhaps you would have seen more success, had you only pointed out the faults in these edits instead of making broad claims backed by faulty logic.


#10
  1. "official" is an ugly term in Free and Open Source Software.

  2. Claims of being "official" requires supporting evidence (not the other way around) .

  3. GrangerHub makes no claims in its work on 1.3 being "official" and is developing 1.3 independently. Although upon 1.3's release we would hope that it's work would be accepted into the primary repo for the Tremulous project and made available on the download page of Tremulous.net, but this is not confirmed yet.

  4. Although I do see that that part of the Wikipedia article needs some corrections/clarification, I don't see it making a claim that GrangerHub's 1.3 project is "official."

  5. GrangerHub's development of Tremulous no less a part of the FOSS Tremulous project as any other development of Tremulous.

  6. Issues with Wikipedia articles should be addressed through Wikipedia.


#11

I think we can all agree that Darklegion invented and developed Tremulous.
So everything you do is not official. Doesn't matter what you say or what 'evidence' you come up with.
If you want to develop an official release you have to ask Darklegion. As long as this is not the case its fake or a fork or a fan project /whatever. Ppl with common sense will agree with this.


#12

Had someone from GrangerHub contacted anyone of those people then yes they would have something to do with them (a conversation/friendship/business partnership). Whether they are a part/member of darklegion development is another thing entirely. Your original claim is therefore inaccurate, working with or being a part of someone/something is not the same thing. You do not have to be part of Darklegion development to edit a wiki post of an open source game they developed.

If you have severe concerns about this "vandalism" You should contact Darklegion of Wikipedia themselves.

Can you define your use/definition of "official" It's really muddy.

Currently you can connect and play on granger hub servers using only the official tremulous release client (if you want)

Let me make it very clear that (as far as I am aware) GrangerHub did not endorse or direct anyone to edit the public tremulous wiki page.


#13

What a waste of words. Fact is: you are not Darklegion so don't call your stuff official. Period.


#14

Yet all your maps are ripoffs of other peoples works but you call them "official" releases that you horde to your grubby self.


#15

What has this todo with this topic? Also i didn't call them official. You are just crazy.


#16

It's the topic discussion


#17

WTF you edit my posting and include lies in it? WTF
// he deleted it but it was too late. You should be demoted.


#18

No. You spread lies about me and my work and insulted me so what has that to do with this topic? Nothing. You are just raging.

//What is this? Crazytown?


#19

I'm sorry you think I am spreading lies about you and your map work. I am also sorry you think that I have insulted you.

This topic discussion is about the editing of wikipedia articles by a supposed member of the grangerhub team. Is that correct?

The editing to that article has come under scrutiny due to it's use of the word "official"

I would like to ask what your personal definition is of the word "official"

Here is the oxford english dictionary definition "official"
əˈfɪʃ(ə)l/Submit
adjective
1.
relating to an authority or public body and its activities and responsibilities."

I feel this describes GrangerHubs current activities on Tremulous. Darklegion have been dead for half a decade.

I think you may be confusing official with authentic or possibly original.


#20

What is all this shit talking? You know exactly what this is about. No 1 would release a new OS using the name WINDOWS and call it the official (original). You try to talk your way out of this thats all. What is so bad about calling it grangerhub 1.0 or whatever?
The thing is that ppl get upset by the fact that ghub 'claims' the be the new copyright holder of tremulous and release a new version without any authorization. You may say now: "we never said we have the copyright", that might be correct. But doesn't matter ANYWAYS because of your naming politics you let it look like you do. Murnatan did the same and thankfully changed their politics.